What are the pros and cons of such a policy?
2006-07-30 15:56:58 · 8 answers · asked by dardo4u2 1 in Social Science ➔ Sociology
No, tax dollars should not go to give these organizations any opportunity to spread their views.
2006-07-30 15:59:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The constitution states that the the government cannot establish a state religion, but there is nothing prohibiting religious based organizations from competing for government funds to perform a service.
In fact, our founding fathers were Christian, and public education was handled by the churches at that time.
To censure or prohibit one non-profit organization from participating in these programs, or to exclude them simply based on the faith of its members would be discrimination based on religion.
The qualifications to receive funds and participate must be based on the organization's ability to do the job well, not on the religion of its members.
2006-07-30 23:05:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's look at it from extremes. Group A is a religious fundamental group that preaches love among its followers and intolerance of other group (i.e. the Taliban). Group B is a pseudo religious group that want to advance their agenda to make the country "great again" (i.e. the Kl Klux Klan). Group C is a mainstream religious group that preaches love thy neighbor, but condemns their own children to hell if they do not follow the teachings (i.e. the Catholic Church).
How does the government decide which groups are worthy of funding? They can't. There is nothing wrong with individuals giving money to the organization of their choice, but the government should not take my money and give it to these groups.
And if you look at where the funding went before the last election, it went to churches in swing states. Clearly political.
2006-07-30 23:04:53 · answer #3 · answered by Steve R 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I just found out that there are something like a quarter of a million clergy preaching in FL prisons and yet only 800 people got their GED this year. Why can't the faith based initiatives at least help them read Other books besides the bible??
2006-07-30 23:01:02 · answer #4 · answered by Molly 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tough question, when you consider that all sorts of bullshit gets federal funding. Churches often help the community in many ways. Sometimes just "being there" is a plus to a deteriorating neighborhood. Also sometimes they run as homeless shelters on certain nights.
In Germany, I believe, every male has to serve 1year in the military, however they can opt to work for the church instead. One guy I met worked for Tabor Lutheran Church in Philly and that counted for his "social service" in Germany.
2006-07-30 23:11:12 · answer #5 · answered by kyle l 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should divide people into believing and not believing in God and change the criteria of donations. There are many organizations that claim that they are not religious but they are religious in fact. Let's say atheist say they are not religion but they interfere in religion by fighting them. So they act as religion competition. And should they be entitled to founds and their opponents not? I think that the only reason of paying for anything is not the mark of it but the consent of society who pays. In other situation we may cut the fuel to majority who pays taxes and give support to majority who lacks social acceptance.
2006-07-31 15:16:46 · answer #6 · answered by Michaelcz55 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they are helping the community such as drug abuse centers, rape centers, teen pregnancy centers, why not? Sure is a lot less expensive than paying more, cops, hospitals, healthcare, etc.
2006-07-30 23:00:39 · answer #7 · answered by justmeagain 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Everyone believes in something weather it's God Buda or nothing. So if we say no to faith based then we should say no to all.
2006-07-30 23:01:52 · answer #8 · answered by chris r 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋